Re: NIH mandate - institutional repositories

["Anthony Watkinson" <anthony.watkinson@btopenworld.com>]

I cannot claim to be an expert on institutional repositories and their
history but the first time I became aware of them was from a presentation by
Ann Wolpert one the originators of DSpace. It was my understanding then and
it is my understanding now that for some involved in the IR movement the
purpose was to provide a service to faculty. The DSpace mission from one of
the sites reads:

DSpaceT is a free, open source software platform that allows 
research organizations to offer faculty and researchers a 
professionally managed searchable archive for their digital 
assets. DSpace focuses on simple access to these assets, as well 
as their long-term preservation.

It is my understanding that DSpace development was in progress by 
2000.

In 2002 a very different definition was proposed by Raym Crow in 
his SPARC position paper - see 
http://www.arl.org/sparc/bm~doc/ir_final_release_102.pdf. The 
definition of IRs set out in his abstract is very different and 
speaks of reforming scholarly communication in line with the 
SPARC agenda.

My picture is that SPARC have attempted to hi-jack an agenda 
which was faculty-centred into one which is library-centred, some 
libraries that is. The mandates proposed are only necessary 
because faculty persistently refuse to fit in with this new 
agenda which does not represent their needs or wishes.

Anthony Watkinson

----- Original Message -----
From: "Barbara Birenbaum" <bbirenbaum@ucla.edu>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:45 PM
Subject: NIH mandate - institutional repositories


>I am an MLIS student at UCLA.  I am currently working on a paper on
> institutional repositories.  I understand from some of my readings
> that the reality of the institutional repository has moved in another
> direction from the concepts of both the OA model of access and the
> SPARC model of encouraging alternative methods of scholarly
> publication.  Will the NIH mandate, if it is signed into law, move the
> institutional repository back to one or both of its prior purposes or
> will those concepts remain just a part of the broader scope of the
> present repositories?  I would really appreciate hearing the list
> members' thoughts on this.
>
>
>
> Barbara Birenbaum
>
>

------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C82B9F.563FB7F0
Content-Type: image/gif;
 	name="spacer.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Location: http://web.mit.edu/edtech/img/spacer.gif

R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAICRAEAOw==

------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C82B9F.563FB7F0--